Irn-Bru wrote:Re-entry into the thread, claiming to have "thought it over more." Stated opinion clearly has not changed, but "fresh look" ethos contributes to a rhetorical edge. Seeming willingness to reconsider opinion makes Username look more extreme in holding to his view so strongly.

Recognition of increasing hilarity of Inu-Bru accompanied by A FEW CAPS before exposing "fresh look" = "rhetorical edge" claim as yet another easily-seen-through way for incorrect poster to sound thoughtful and open minded when clearly arrogant and wrong the whole time.

Development of fresh thoughts combined with new selected statistics to make Username's argument appear antediluvian and not taking into account today's NFL. Reference (of ambiguous nature) to other franchises who have had greater success than the Redskins in recent seasons. Point out that, among about 8,000 variables, they happen to embody my version of this argument, not Username's.

A FEW MORE (AND BOLD) CAPS SHOWING (UNINTERESTED) READERS THAT "FRESH THOUGHTS" ABOVE ARE PLAGARIZED - ENDING WITH EXCLAMATION POINT!

Correlation proves causation. Checkmate, Irn-Bru.

Expression of hope that above quote is as funny to poster as it is to Username.

Completely unrelated statement of support for politician Inu-Bru is known to irrationally hate.

Late-to-the-thread user posts 5,000 word reply rehashing much of what has already been written and doing it in such a way that the poster is obviously convinced of his own brilliance, convinced that his post will be THE post to brilliantly condense the topic to its core principles. Usually takes the form of "come on guys, X is obviously the answer."

Fios wrote:Generic moderator warning imploring the waring parties to abide by the personal attack rules. This is often followed by one of the two parties asking how they violated said rule and accusing the other person of more egregious violations. Moderator is then forced to reiterate that the thread has not been moved or locked and that the post was a reminder to adhere to the rules, not an admonishment.

Angry & obnoxious rant claiming that said moderator is a bully, and is abusing his authority. Possible obscure and irrelevant references to the U.S. Constitution. Empty threats to leave the board, implying that someone actually cares.

More friendly and half-kidding (while still vague) comment about said moderator, in an attempt to avoid being kicked off the board. Emoticon.

Last edited by joebagadonuts on Fri Feb 15, 2008 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm a jack of all trades, the master of three
Rockin' the tables, rockin' the mikes, rockin' the young lay-dees.

Attempt to sneak in another argument after thread has drifted and Username has not been to the board in a few days. Hope abounds that thread will be buried in forum that has gotten busy recently over trade rumor / coaching decision. Short and sweet summation that will (hopefully) go down as the last post in this thread, creating some sense of finality and giving Irn-Bru the proverbial last word.

Contemplation of adding in additional statistics followed by a 30 minutes of fishing around pro football reference. (No set of stats, however manipulated, seems useful for purpose.) Opt for quick exit and proceed to defensive strategy of hoping Username doesn't notice post amidst sea of other threads.

Leaving this thread to contribute posts of questionable substance to several others, moving them to the top and pushing this one below the realm of active debate.

"I’m never under the assumption that you draft for need. You draft the best available football player on the board. ... Because, in the long run, they are the ones who will help you win the most games." - Scot McCloughan

Eye-opening realization from Username that this utterly useless and nearly incomprehensible ancient thread contains more amusement and enjoyment than any alternative readings presently. Shocked Emoticon.